[Origin]

Scientists think that the vacuum is filled with virtual particles corresponding...

You're a hoot Dave, half the time you say scientist don't know what they are talking about and the other half of the time you are trying to using them for support of your ideas.

[Kryptid]

Scientists think that the vacuum is filled with virtual particles corresponding to every type of actual subatomic particle that has been discovered. For example, they think that the vacuum includes incredibly short-lived virtual electrons, and incredibly short-lived virtual quarks (because both electrons and quarks are known types of subatomic particles).
For every 10,000,000,000 anti-matter particles there are 10,000,000,001 matter particles, an asymmetry of 1 particle out of 10 billion. And the endresult is that every 10 billion matter/anti-matter pairs annihilated each other leaving behind 1 matter particle and 10 billion photons.
After infinite time, our infinite universe was already full with infinite particles due to VE.
Over time, gravity slowly shepherded the densest regions of particles into compact clouds, which ultimately collapsed to form the first BH.

How did those short-lived virtual particles in the vacuum turn into long-lived real particles?

[Dave Lev (OP)]

The only evidence for this is the BBT.
You can't use it to show that the BBT is wrong.

There are several positive aspects in the BBT.
I can use any positive aspect as I wish.
In theory D I do not invent the wheel.
It is based on real science.
Even the creation of real particle pair from VE energy is real:

Source:
http://www.markmahin.com/vacuum.html

Scientists think that the vacuum is filled with virtual particles corresponding to every type of actual subatomic particle that has been discovered. For example, they think that the vacuum includes incredibly short-lived virtual electrons, and incredibly short-lived virtual quarks (because both electrons and quarks are known types of subatomic particles).

Our scientists also claim that:
"Imagine if there was a weird rule in your living room that every second 10,000 fireflies had to pop into existence, but that each of them would disappear a fraction of a second later. You might then see in your living room these weird little streaks of motion and flashes that would be the signs of short-lived fireflies existing for an instant before disappearing. Scientists think that the vacuum of space is a little like that, except that the fireflies are subatomic virtual particles, so we can't see anything like the streaks and flashes."
"A virtual particle with mass is a particle that pops into existence and then pops out of existence a tiny fraction of a second later."
However, there is high similarity between the VE to the EM energy.
So, if due to VE A virtual particle with mass is a particle that pops into existence and then pops out of existence a tiny fraction of a second later, then the same activity should also take place due to the BH's EM near its event horizon.
Therefore, the rule of new particle creation by the BH must be real.

The BBT as is is incorrect as our scientists totally failed to show its source of energy.
I have already offer the BBT to start with the VE energy that is always there in the infinite space of our Universe.
So, the BBT should start while the space of the Universe is infinite and fixed and VE is there in the empty space.
If you do so, and understand that new virtual particle pair can pop up due to the EM, you get to theory D.
So simple and easy.
Again - In theory D I do not invent the wheel.
All the real data is there infront of our nose. We only need to verify what is real and what imagination is.

How did those short-lived virtual particles in the vacuum turn into long-lived real particles?

I agree, they can't live forever.

You get photons as part of  the vacuum energy.
So you still have to explain why, if your mechanism works, the universe is not full of BH.

You have got the answer by Kryptid.
The New created particles can't live forever.
Therefore, if after some time they won't set a BH, they would just die.
Hence, there is no BH is every cc of the universe.
However in the infinite universe there must be infinite stars, infinite galaxies and also infinite BHs, but that doesn't mean that in every cc there is a massive spiral galaxy or a BH.

[Bored chemist]

You have got the answer by Kryptid.
The New created particles can't live forever.
Therefore, if after some time they won't set a BH, they would just die.
Hence, there is no BH is every cc of the universe.

No point trying to blame someone else.
You have not  understood the problem.
If the probability of getting a BH is zero then, even in an infinite time there will be no BH so we would not be here.
If the probability is greater than zero then, in an infinite times there would be an infinite number of BH and we would not be here.

Which sort of wrong are you?

[Bored chemist]

There are several positive aspects in the BBT.
I can use any positive aspect as I wish.

You can not do that unless you have finally accepted that the BBT is true.

[Bored chemist]

After infinite time, our infinite universe was already full with infinite particles due to VE.
Over time, gravity slowly shepherded the densest regions of particles into compact clouds, which ultimately collapsed to form the first BH.

And this process would continue.
Gravity would shepherd the BH into clouds which would collapse into bigger BH.
Eventually, the whole of the universe would have "fallen in".
But that's not what we see, so we know your idea is wrong.

Quote from: Bored chemist on 11/09/2021 22:11:40
Quote from: Bored chemist on Yesterday at 17:17:54
Quote from: Bored chemist on Today at 16:47:31
We can't move on until you understand this subject.

[Origin]

There are several positive aspects in the BBT.
I can use any positive aspect as I wish.

Of course you can since all you are doing is making uninformed guesses about things which you don't understand.

[Kryptid]

I agree, they can't live forever.

That didn't answer the question. In order to become a black hole, those virtual particles must turn into real particles. Otherwise, they will just disappear back into the vacuum from which they came.

[Bored chemist]

I agree, they can't live forever.

That didn't answer the question. In order to become a black hole, those virtual particles must turn into real particles. Otherwise, they will just disappear back into the vacuum from which they came.

Essentially, his reply is "They can't live forever, but they do".

[Dave Lev (OP)]

That didn't answer the question. In order to become a black hole, those virtual particles must turn into real particles. Otherwise, they will just disappear back into the vacuum from which they came.

I have already answered this question by the following message:

For every 10,000,000,000 anti-matter particles there are 10,000,000,001 matter particles, an asymmetry of 1 particle out of 10 billion. And the endresult is that every 10 billion matter/anti-matter pairs annihilated each other leaving behind 1 matter particle and 10 billion photons.
Source:
http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/21st_century_science/lectures/lec26.html

Do you have any problem with this explanation?

[Dave Lev (OP)]

There are several positive aspects in the BBT.
I can use any positive aspect as I wish.

Of course you can since all you are doing is making uninformed guesses about things which you don't understand.

You claim that I don't understand.
So, it is expected that at least you do understand.
If so,  would you kindly explain how the entire energy for the BBT theory had been created while there was no Space and No Universe. If it comes from some Brane or other imagination - then please explain how it had been created there without breaking the conservation law.

[Kryptid]

I have already answered this question by the following message:

That does not explain how the virtual particles became real particles.

[Bored chemist]

If it comes from some Brane or other imagination - then please explain how it had been created there without breaking the conservation law.

The laws of physics apply in our universe (or, at least, our bit of it).
There is no reason for them to apply outside of it- for example in Brane cosmology.

Again it's one of those "did you think this was difficult" questions you ask.

[Dave Lev (OP)]

I have already answered this question by the following message:

That does not explain how the virtual particles became real particles.

What about the following:

Scientists think that the vacuum is filled with virtual particles corresponding to every type of actual subatomic particle that has been discovered. For example, they think that the vacuum includes incredibly short-lived virtual electrons, and incredibly short-lived virtual quarks (because both electrons and quarks are known types of subatomic particles).

[Bored chemist]

Do you have any problem with this explanation?

Yes.
Those numbers are for the BB where we know roughly the proportion of matter to antimatter.
But we have less evidence for any process happening today.
In particular, if there were about ten billion annihilation events for each particle, we would expect to see the characteristic gamma rays.
But we don't.
Because virtual particles don't normally become real.
Which leads, once more, to this question, which you have not answered.

How did those short-lived virtual particles in the vacuum turn into long-lived real particles?

and also

how the virtual particles became real particles.

[Bored chemist]

I have already answered this question by the following message:

That does not explain how the virtual particles became real particles.

What about the following:

Scientists think that the vacuum is filled with virtual particles corresponding to every type of actual subatomic particle that has been discovered. For example, they think that the vacuum includes incredibly short-lived virtual electrons, and incredibly short-lived virtual quarks (because both electrons and quarks are known types of subatomic particles).

Did you even read the question?

[Kryptid]

What about the following:

Telling me the vacuum is filled with virtual particles does not tell me how those virtual particles supposedly became real particles.

If it comes from some Brane or other imagination

Why do you call branes imagination?

[Dave Lev (OP)]

The laws of physics apply in our universe (or, at least, our bit of it).
There is no reason for them to apply outside of it- for example in Brane cosmology.

Our space is also a brane. It is even called a 3D brane
So, as the laws of physics apply in our 3D brane, why those laws can't apply in any other external 3D brane

Why do you call branes imagination?

If it is real, then the laws of physics must apply over there.

[Kryptid]

If it is real, then the laws of physics must apply over there.

That's not what I asked. I asked why you considered branes to be imagination.

Also, how do virtual particles become real particles?

[Dave Lev (OP)]

how do virtual particles become real particles?

Telling me the vacuum is filled with virtual particles does not tell me how those virtual particles supposedly became real particles.

Do you agree that our Scientists think that:
"the vacuum is filled with virtual particles corresponding to every type of actual subatomic particle that has been discovered. For example, they think that the vacuum includes incredibly short-lived virtual electrons, and incredibly short-lived virtual quarks (because both electrons and quarks are known types of subatomic particles)."
If you still worry about it then:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221268641300037X
Virtual particles in vacuum. According to quantum electrodynamics (QED) and quantum chromodynamics (QCD), virtual particle pairs are continuously being created and annihilated in the vacuum. These virtual particles can be revealed in several experiments, for example, when placing two uncharged metallic plates in the vacuum (the Casimir effect).

This phenomenon is predicted by CEN. In fact, CEN is the only theory that predicts the exact mechanism responsible for this phenomenon. In CEN terms, these virtual particles are referred to as “potentially additional elements” that appear from ‘nothing’ and nullify each other (see Section 2.2). Note that although in Section 2.2 the potentially additional elements are presented as ‘bits,’ the same mechanism allows also the appearance of nullifying bit compounds, like virtual particle pairs. This is an integral process in CEN that happens on a regular basis, and everywhere in space.

Moreover, according to CEN, potentially additional elements are served as triggers for changes in the Universe. This notion is supported by experiments in which virtual particles serve as triggers to physical processes. For example, β-decay (in which a neutron decays to a proton, an electron, and an anti-neutrino) is carried-out via a virtual (mediating) W boson. In fact, as stated in [21], most particle processes are mediated by virtual-carrier particles.

3.
Matter and anti-matter. The existence of matter and antimatter is a built-in property in CEN. According to CEN, the Universe was formed by bits and anti-bits, or particles and anti-particles (see above). In addition, the first infoelements could represent information and anti-information (the existence of ‘something’ and the non-existence of this ‘something’).

CEN also predicts the creation of matter and anti-matter from the vaccum in the following way. According to CEN, matter and antimatter can be originated as virtual particle pairs (potentially additional elements), and become “real” due to their attachment to information in the Universe, by causing a symmetry break. This notion of matter and antimatter creation from the vacuum is supported by experiments. For example, the work in [22] show how it is possible to generate matter and antimatter from the vacuum using high-energy electron beam combined with an intense laser pulse."
If that is not good enough for you, then we have a problem.